PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CFO vs. GLOW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CFO vs. GLOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) and VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF (GLOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CFO achieves a 6.66% return, which is significantly lower than GLOW's 10.91% return.


CFO

1D
-0.30%
1M
1.87%
YTD
6.66%
6M
6.96%
1Y
13.59%
3Y*
10.44%
5Y*
3.88%
10Y*
9.36%

GLOW

1D
-0.73%
1M
5.26%
YTD
10.91%
6M
11.97%
1Y
26.85%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CFO vs. GLOW - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CFO and GLOW is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2024

0.84

The correlation between CFO and GLOW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

CFO vs. GLOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CFO
GLOW

Industrials

18.4%
8.6%

Financial Services

18.3%
20.0%

Technology

14.9%
25.2%

Consumer Cyclical

9.8%
6.4%

Healthcare

9.5%
13.7%

Utilities

9.0%
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
5.1%

Energy

5.5%
1.7%

Basic Materials

3.6%
2.2%

Communication Services

3.6%
11.8%

Real Estate

0.5%
1.0%

Industrials

CFO
18.4%
GLOW
8.6%

Financial Services

CFO
18.3%
GLOW
20.0%

Technology

CFO
14.9%
GLOW
25.2%

Consumer Cyclical

CFO
9.8%
GLOW
6.4%

Healthcare

CFO
9.5%
GLOW
13.7%

Utilities

CFO
9.0%
GLOW
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

CFO
6.8%
GLOW
5.1%

Energy

CFO
5.5%
GLOW
1.7%

Basic Materials

CFO
3.6%
GLOW
2.2%

Communication Services

CFO
3.6%
GLOW
11.8%

Real Estate

CFO
0.5%
GLOW
1.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

CFO vs. GLOW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CFO
CFO Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
CFO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CFO Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
CFO Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
CFO Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
CFO Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank

GLOW
GLOW Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
GLOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLOW Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
GLOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLOW Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CFO vs. GLOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) and VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF (GLOW). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


CFOGLOWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.93

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.39

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.92

2.89

-0.97

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.10

12.39

-5.29

CFO vs. GLOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CFO Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is lower than the GLOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CFO and GLOW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CFOGLOWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.27

2.20

-0.93

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.71

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.65

1.27

-0.62

Drawdowns

CFO vs. GLOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CFO drawdown since its inception was -24.35%, which is greater than GLOW's maximum drawdown of -15.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFO and GLOW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CFOGLOWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.35%

-15.58%

-8.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.10%

-9.33%

+2.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.30%

-0.73%

+0.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.62%

-1.81%

-3.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.92%

2.17%

-0.25%

Volatility

CFO vs. GLOW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) is 2.42%, while VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF (GLOW) has a volatility of 3.65%. This indicates that CFO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CFOGLOWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.42%

3.65%

-1.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.79%

9.62%

-1.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.75%

12.27%

-1.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.32%

15.16%

-1.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.27%

15.16%

-1.89%

CFO vs. GLOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

CFO has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GLOW's 0.72% expense ratio.


Dividends

CFO vs. GLOW - Dividend Comparison

CFO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.24%, more than GLOW's 1.12% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CFO
VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF
1.24%1.32%1.44%1.72%3.95%1.06%0.90%1.44%1.49%1.18%1.35%1.31%
GLOW
VictoryShares WestEnd Global Equity ETF
1.12%1.33%1.18%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CFO and GLOW have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GLOW has higher volatility (3.65%) compared to CFO (2.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CFO dropped -24.35% vs GLOW's -15.58%.

On 1-year performance, GLOW leads with 26.85% vs 13.59% for CFO. On fees, CFO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CFO has been the lower-risk option at 2.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, GLOW has performed better with a 26.85% return vs 13.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CFO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for GLOW.

CFO has the higher dividend yield at 1.24%, compared with 1.12% for GLOW.

CFO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while GLOW is Global Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CFO and 0.72% for GLOW.

GLOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.27), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CFO and GLOW

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer